Raju KumarversusThe Dept. of Vigilance through its Director General, Bihar, Patna

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6969 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Raju Kumar S/O Shiv Shankar Sahani R/o-Village-Roshanpur Sapaha, Ward
                 No.-07. P.S- Sugauli, Dist.-East- Champaran at Motihari.

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner
                                                     Versus
                 The Dept. of Vigilance through its Director General, Bihar, Patna Patna

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Onkar Nath, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Arvind Kumar,Spl.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-03-2026                        Heard Mr. Onkar Nath, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   Vigilance.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   17.10.2025 in connection with Special (Vigilance) Case No. 92

                   of 2025 for the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of P.C.

                   Act, 1988.

                               3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that allegation as

                   per F.I.R. in brief is that the informant addressed a written

                   complain mentioning therein that the demand of the land

                   pertaining to Mauza-Anarwan Salaiya, Anchal-Dumariya, Khata

                   No.-35, Plot No.-159, 279, 178, 149, 192, 79, 69 of Gaya

                   district for an area of 124 Acre (approx) is existing in register-2

                   in the name of my family members. The further allegation is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6969 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
                                            2/4




          the online application for parimarjan dt.-02.08.2025 has been

          entered consisting Application No.-(1) 253557492821580, (2)

          253554382821624,                 (3)         253552612821655,   (4)

          253562892821750 & (5) 253524832871543 for which the

          revenue receipt since 1965 till 2016-2017 is already existing.

          The further allegation is that the informant went to the Circle

          Office on 02.09.2025 to get interrogation about the online

          parimarjan & complain that the revenue official (Raju Kumar)

          has forwarded three (3) applications out of six (6) applications

          to your login & then the Circle Officer suggested to meet the

          petitioner & soon onwards the informant on the same day met to

          the petitioner and asked that the Circle Officer has sent to meet

          you, & then the petitioner replied that altogether six (6)

          applications had come to me & three (3) of them has been sent

          to the Circle Officer for land verification & the rest three (3)

          applications are with me & if you are interested to get the work

          performed, then you are to give a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs.

          Five Lacs Only), failing which you would run from pillar to post

          to get the work performed. The further allegation is that the

          informant requested, saying that I am farmer & so isn't possible

          to arrange such a huge money but the petitioner replied as early

          as you would arrange the amount, your work would be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6969 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
                                            3/4




          performed similarly.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner has clean antecedent and as per the allegation in the

          FIR, the petitioner has demanded Rs.3,00,000/- from the

          informant for entering the Khata Number in question for

          rectification in the register-2. It is further submitted that the

          allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the

          petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

          Apart from the aforesaid, the police has submitted charge-sheet

          and the petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2025. It is next

          submitted that there is no question of tampering the evidence

          and, in fact, the petitioner has cooperated in the case for ready

          disposal of the same.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the

          other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          petitioner and submits that petitioner is arrested along with

          Rs.1,51,000/- which is demanded for the rectification of the

          khata number in question.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of

          the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6969 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
                                                      4/4




                    Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna in connection with Special

                    (Vigilance) Case No. 92 of 2025, subject to the following

                    conditions:-

                                 i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                    properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

                    and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                    on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                    reason, his bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below.

                                 ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                    witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                    move for cancellation of bail.

                                 iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                    verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                    any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                    criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                    cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                    acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                    shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                    verification.



                                           (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U      T